I cover the video game industry, write about gamers, and review video games.
You can follow me on Twitter and hit me up there if you have any questions or comments you'd like to chat about.
Disclosure: Many of the video games I review were provided as free review copies. This does not influence my coverage or reviews of these games.
I do not own stock in any of the companies I cover. I do not back any Kickstarter projects related to video games. I do not fund anyone in the industry on Patreon.

But the PC streaming has an important and much-overlooked footnote: it will be available only for a select few PCs.

If you own any fairly new Nvidia-branded GPU, you’ll be able “ to wirelessly access your GeForce® GTX-powered computer from the comfort of your couch. Play your favorite PC games, including great titles from Steam, on a full-size game controller with ultra-low latency thanks to Project SHIELD’s game-speed Wi-Fi and the fast performance of GeForce GTX 600 GPUs” according to the Project Shield website.

If you don’t have the proper card, you’ll still be able to play Android games.

Which means I’ll have to reiterate some quibbles I had with the Ouya—a $99 console set to revolutionize gaming by ushering in an era of free-to-play mobile games for your TV.

For one thing, mobile games are typically designed for small screens. What works on a mobile phone or even a tablet may not translate to a 60″ HD TV. Some may, and it’s possible that more and more developers will begin developing games designed for big screens, but that’s a gamble.

Of course, the Shield doesn’t just output (via HDMI) to your big screen TV, so those mobile games may fit better on its screen than they do with the Ouya. Then again, why would I need the Shield if I already own an Android phone or tablet if not to output to the TV? Of course, there are other considerations.

Come On, Come On, Come On Now Touch Me Babe

Mobile touch-screen games are not often designed for a controller, so a great many will need to be retrofitted to work on the Ouya or to make use of the Shield controller. True, a controller makes many games better, which is why I enjoy playing on a 3DS or the Vita (both of which integrate touch-screen gaming with more traditional controls) more than on my phone.

But given the massive install base for Android on touch-only devices it will take some big incentives to port these titles to a new control scheme for the handful of Android devices that are attempting to integrate more traditional controllers into the mix. Maybe that hurdle is not as high as it sounds, and more than just shovelware will make its way to these devices. We’ll know soon enough.

I don’t think there will be a lack of content on Ouya or Shield—I do suspect, however, that there will be a lack of good, compelling and system-selling content, or that most Android games will make the big leap en masse to non-traditional systems.

For hardcore PC gamers, the Nvidia Shield may be a great buy one way or another, especially if you already own a contemporary Nvidia GPU. For my part, I can see some advantages being able to stream Dark Souls from my Steam account straight to my TV without having to lug the rig across the room or have a PC case sitting in my entertainment center.

Then again, with the Steambox around the corner, I’m not sure I’d have a huge reason to get a handheld like the Shield. If there was a mechanism which allowed me to utilize the Shield as a second local screen I might change my mind. Being able to play local co-op or competitive multiplayer on my PC and TV from one game account would be excellent.

Free To Play, But Not Really

I think the thing that bothers me most about this rush toward Android, however, is both my experience with the offerings in the Google Play store (when it comes to games at least) and my distaste of Free-to-Play as a business model (9 times out of 10.)

The Ouya made a big deal out of this, championing the “all games will be free (mostly)” line during its Kickstarter campaign. Of course, Free-to-Play (F2P) is a misnomer or nobody would be in the business to begin with. For free games to generate revenue, they must adopt some form of paywall or pay-as-you-go scheme. Freemium content vis-a-vis a “gem store” or some other garden wall creates games that feel like endless demos. The few games to get the formula right are few and far between—and no Dota 2 model has yet appeared on mobile devices.

Unlike the Ouya, Nvidia plans to make money purely off of hardware sales rather than taking a cut of the software sales. That’s admirable, but not necessarily surprising. Nvidia is a hardware company first and foremost. Still, this means that the Shield will be more expensive than one subsidized by the promise of fat cuts from app sales.

To truly take advantage of the Shield by using it as a PC streaming device, you’ll need at the very least a GTX 650 or better, which could mean another $100 or so on top of the purchase if you need to upgrade (or more if you need to buy an entirely new laptop or desktop PC.) Over time it will be more likely that more people have these installed already, but initially the Shield may only appeal to a small slice of the gaming public.

Android Is Already Fractured

Finally, this strikes me as yet another crack in an already highly-fractured Android market. The Ouya, the various “gaming-specific” Android handhelds, the Shield—these all promise fundamentally different gaming experiences utilizing the same operating system.

With the market already highly fractured among mobile phone users (with a very small slice of the Android user-base utilizing the latest version of the OS) this presents a problem for developers and consumers alike.

This is why iOS has an edge in the mobile market when it comes to quality game design.

Maybe all of these devices will be successful in their own right. But for a console to be truly successful a large install base is necessary. This is still true with Android-based devices that don’t fit the mobile-touchscreen model. Tech bloggers love to throw around the term “disruptive” whenever a new piece of hardware floats across the stage.

Sometimes we really do see something disrupt the status quo—Apple has a strong track record in this department.

Most innovations, however, are not as disruptive as we’d like to think.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

The value of Shield is derived from the ability to play the most interactive games anywhere. Initially it’s limited to PC games in your house, and a handful of highly interactive Android games. But, if Grid services were to take hold, then you really have something.

All the press focus seems to be on Shield yet, the true disruptive influence by NVIDIA is two new features related to the Tegra 4 smartphone/tablet processor.

1. hardware integrated photography acceleration: 10x the speed for photographs compared to the newest Apple chip. Being a hardware solution it will be harder for other chip makers to implement similar capability without running into patent issues. Should give NVIDIA a 2yr+ lead in picture taking capability for smartphones.

2. LTE modem with 40% less die space than competitors: A big advertised piece is greately reduced power usage compared to competitor LTE modems. Should give NVIDIA a 1.5+ year lead in power consumption when streaming data compared to other smartphone/tablet modem makers.

What does this mean? Those that adopt the Tegra 4 for their smartphones will have a competitive edge in not only the fastest processor and graphics currently announced but also better photography capability and battery life. Those shopping for features will find the Tegra 4 in the lead for the first year after release and still highly competitive in the second year after release.

I know this is only tangentially related to the actual article, but I kind of think it’s time to stop viewing android as a platform, per se. People might want to start thinking about the diachotamy as more in line with desktop PCs.

You have different versions of the OS, on different hardware platforms; the combination therein determines what software is and is not compatible with your device; not the OS itself.

So yes, one does expect iOS software to have a rigid and defined compatability list; because there is only one manufacturer making the devices that run the one OS.

It’s more than that, though. Windows has historically been basically the same across devices. The devices may vary a great deal, but the operating system fulfilled one standard function. With Android, you have a system built for touch-based devices, but now with Ouya and other systems there’s a push toward *very* different control mechanisms. So instead of just specs, you’re looking at revamping all sorts of games so that they can work without touch controls (or with additional non-touch controls.) Likewise, you’re moving from tiny screens to huge screens whereas with PCs you had largely similar-sized sreens and resolutions to account for. It’s not insurmountable, by any means, but these are stumbling blocks.

Fair enough, but there’s always been a fair amount of different versions of Windows released all the time, from different service packs required or simply not running on server versions or professional versions that don’t do all the same things.

Overall, I see them as basically being the same overall, but there’s obviously differences.